




asH3 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




012 027 622 O 



Hollinger 

pH8.5 

Mill Run F3-1955 



E 458 
.4 

.B82 
Copy 3 



.OVAL PUBLICATION SOCIETY 



863 BROADWAY. 



A'o. 68. 



®k tf 0wanfe' ffi0tut^ttti0tt 





NEW YORK : 

Published bv the Loyal Publication Society. 

1864. 



LOYAL PUBLICATION SOCIETY, 

863 BROADWAY, NEW YORK. 



DECLARATORY RESOLUTION. 

The object of the Society is expressed in the following Resolu- 
tion^ formally adopted hy unanimous vote of the Society^ at 
its first Anniversary Meeting^ February 13, 1864. 

Resohed and declared, That the object of the Loyal Publication Society 
is, and shall be, to publish and distribute tracts, papers and journals, of 
unquestionable loyalty, throughout the United States, in the cities and the 
country, in the army and navy, and in hospitals, thus to diffuse knowledge 
and stimulate a broad national patriotism, and to aid in the suppression of the 
Rebellion by the extinction of its causes, and in the preservation of the in- 
tegrity of the Nation, by counteracting the efforts of the advocates of a dis- 
graceful and disintegrating Peace. 

Persons sympathising with the design of this Society, and 
wishing to contribute to its support, may address 

MORRIS KETCHUM, Esq., Treasurer, 40 Exchange Place, 

by whom receipts will be promptly returned. 



OFFICEES OF THE SOCIETY. 

President. Treasurer* 

FRANCIS LIEBER. MORRIS KETCHUM. 

Secretary. 

JOHN AUSTIN STEVENS, Ja. 

Finance Conimlttcet 

JAMES A. ROOSEVELT, Cuairman, 

T. B. CODDINGTON, WILLIAM E. DODGE, Jr. 

DAVID DOWS, ,^„, „ „^T,^^.. JACKSON S. SCHULTZ. 
' LEVI P. MORTON. 

f ubilcatlon Commit tee> 

JAMES McKAYE, Ghatrma:!, 
GROSVENOR P. LOWREY, JOHN AUSTIN STEVENS, Jr., 

DR. F. SCnUTZ, CHARLES ASTOR BRISTED, 

GEO. P. rUTNAM, THEODORE G. GLAUBENSKLEE. 

Ezccutl-ve ConiiiiUtce. 

WILLIAM T. BLODGETT, Chairman, 
CHRISTIAN E. DETMOLD, J. BUTLER WRIGHT, 

GEORGE GIBBS, IE GRAND B. CANNO:^ 

SINCLAIR TOUSEY, W. C. CHURCH, 

CHARLES BUTLER, GEORGE BLISS, Jk. 



LOYAL PUBLICATION SOCIETY 



NEW YORK, 




863 BROADWAY. 



THE COWARDS' CONVENTION-No. 1. 

To the Editor of the New York Times : 



'• An open foe may prove a curse, 
But a pretended friend is worse. "- 



-Gay. 



In this most portentous crisis of our political history, the 
first thing necessary for all loyal men is to know the full ex- 
tent of our danger. It is no use mincing or dodging the 
matter. We have to do with enemies who, if successful, will 
complete the work of their fellow-traitors at the South. The 
secessionists tore the country in two ; the framers of the 
Chicago platform would scatter it in fragments. 

When thus speaking of the so-called Democratic party, I 
have no wish to say much against or about their nominal 
standard-bearer. He was a good, though slow business man ; 
is a good driller, good engineer, and altogether a very fair 
defensive commander. And there is certainly this much 
propriety in his nomination, that if his party succeeds, we 
shall speedily have occasion to try our commander-in-chief's 
capacity in that species of warfare for which he is best 
adapted. 



Nor is it intimated that the War Democrats, whom party 
organization and a misplaced fidelity to names will dragoon 
into the support of a peace platform, have any intention or 
desire of destroying the nation and dividing the country in- 
definitely. They will vote in ignorance of the real issues, as 
hundreds of thousands voted for Pierce in '52, as thousands 
voted for Seymour in '62. Though certainly not blameless, 
since there is an ignorance so blind and wilful that it is 
almost as wicked and quiet as harmful as wickedness itself, 
they may well be acquitted of voluntarily compassing the 
national destruction. 

But neither the nominal leader nor the deluded War 
Democrats will have any hand in shaping the policy of the 
party. Its real managers are the framers of that precious 
confession of faith, the Chicago platform. Horatio Seymour, 
the Prince of Jesuits ; Fernando Wood, a man capable of 
any enormity ; Vallandigham, a Southerner by birth and a 
traitor by profession, as deadly an enemy of the Union as 
Jefferson Davis himself — these are the men who rule the 
Opposition, who direct it now, and will direct it if, for our 
sins, it is permitted to become the government. 

The necessary results of their success are generally under- 
stood, but it is evident the loyal and patriotic public does 
not appreciate the extent of the danger. Thus we hear it 
constantly said, " If the Chicago candidate is elected, the 
restoration of the Union at once* becomes impossible. We 
are humiliated by the recognition of a Southern confederacy ; 
our democratic principles will be violated, and the contiguous 
existence of two rival nations will bring about a chronic 
state of war and all the inconveniences to which Continental 
Europe is subject," &c., &c. All which is true enough so 
far as it goes ; but it goes a very little way into the matter. 
After enumerating these obvious results which the popular 
mind so strongly and so justly deprecates, we are only on the 
top layer of our Pandora's box. If we could demonstrate 
ivith mathematical certainty that a Southern Confederacy 
might be acknowledged on terms neither dishonorable nor 
destructive to ourselves, and that our democratic form o/ 



governrtient might undergo various innovations with impu- 
nity, ive should not have gone the first step toward proving 
that such terms could be p)rocured and such innovations 
would he made by a '■^ peace-at-any -price" President. On 
the contrary, the impossibility of the latter proposition would 
only become clearer by the proof of the former. 
Let usj for the sake of argument, admit — 

1. That a peace, acknowledging the independence of a 
Southern Confederacy, may be made without any disgrace 
to us. 

2. That modifications in our democratic theory and prac- 
tice of government may be made, without ruin, or even with 
benefit, to the country. 

3. That two rival nations may co-exist on the territory of 
the old Union. 

There is nothing in these admissions to interfere with the 
following conclusions : 

1. That the peace made by the so-called Democratic party 
would be a most dishonorable one. 

2. That the modifications of Democratic principles made 
or permitted by them would be highly injurious and 
destructive. 

3. That the North could not exist as an independent 
nation under the rule and on the principles of the Peace 
Democrats. 

(The first and third of these propositions are intimately 
connected, but as the third must come last, since all national 
evils are summed up in destruction, and the question of re- 
construction or separation is the most pressing, and has, 
therefore, a right to the first place, I arrange them as above, 
though the division is somewhat awkward.) 

First, then, we will admit, for the sake of argument, 
that a peace may be made recognizing a Southern Con- 
federacy (note the indefinite articles), on terms not disgrace- 
ful to us. 



(Observe that nothing is said about the safety of such a 
proceeding. Honor, and honor alone, is the subject of our 
story.) 

Such an assumption may be made. It has been made by 
a whole class of persons — the English writers favorable to the 
North, who, disagreeing with the Pro-Slavery Britons on all 
other points, agreed, for some time at least, with them in 
this, that the war would be one "for boundary." However 
much a man like Professor Cairnes, for instance, may have 
mistaken the spirit or the wants of the American people, we 
cannot suspect him of wishing our disgrace. 

But what sort of peace must this be in order not to be dis- 
graceful ? Clearly one of which we, rather than the Con- 
federates, should fix the conditions, they making great sacri- 
fice to obtain the acknowledgment of their "independence." 
It would naturally proceed, as far as possible, on the uti pos- 
sidetis princij)le. It would give us all the Border States 
except East Virginia, whatever view be taken of their condi- 
tion — whether, as we say, they are States which have re- 
mained faithful to the Union, or, as the Confederates and 
philo-Confederate Europeans say, they are "conquered prov- 
inces." We could not expect to keep New Orleans, but we 
should be obliged to retain one fortified position on the Mis- 
sissippi, that our navigation of that river might not be at the 
mercy of paper agreement with repudiators. If we could 
suppose that phenomenon, a well-informed and impartial 
European, to act as umpire, the most he could ask of us 
would be to " rectify the frontier" by ceding Tennessee in 
exchange for Eastern Virginia. It is hardly necessary to 
add that we must have nothing to do with paying any of the 
Confederate expenses, directly or indirectly, or altering any 
of our institutions to suit them, or even acknowledge the 
right of secession, the Confederate independence being ad- 
mitted merely as an accomplished fact, without regard to its 
merits. 

In short, the supposed honorable peace must be such a one 
as would be honorable to us, had the North and the Gulf 
States originally been two distinct sovereignties, fighting for 



the border territory and the navigation of the Mississippi. 
Now, what chances are there that such terms of separation, 
or any like them, would be obtained by the Chicago policy of 
" immediate armistice and ultimate convention" ? 

None, whatever. 

The claims of the Confederates are well known. They de- 
mand every foot of territory south of Mason and Dixon's 
line, including the national capital, the sun-ender of which 
involves the surrender of our national existence. (About 
this there will be somewhat to say hereafter ; for the present, 
we are only speaking of national humiliation.) The sole 
doubtful point is whether they do or do not include Kansas 
in this claim. Some time ago there were grounds for suspect- 
ing that they had relinquished their pretensions to Maryland 
and Delaware ; but Davis has just disposed of that am- 
biguity in his answer to Col. Jaques. He asJcs of us a terri- 
torial cession far more Immiliatincj than that ivhich the lohole 
force of Germany has recently extorted from Denmark : and 
this is the only condition on which he will agree to the " im- 
mediate armistice." And recollect that " Jefferson Davis 
says,'' is a much more comprehensive formula than " Abra- 
ham Lincoln says." The latter is not the people of the 
United States, though as the executive of their Government, 
and -the representative of their majority, his words have great 
weight ; but Davis is the State, in Secession, as much as 
Louis Napoleon is in France, despite his hypocritical pre- 
tence of being unable to interfere with the individual " sover- 
eignties." 

But this is not all. Far from it. The prominent rebel 
organs have repeatedly announced as essential conditions of 
peace, that we should acknowledge the right of secession, 
return to Slavery all the negroes whom the progress of the 
war has set free, or pay their value, repudiate our own debt, to 
punish the loyal men who hold it, and — ^last humiliation of 
a conquered people — do what they would never do for them- 
selves, pay theirs ! 

Will it be said, " It is easy to claim anything, but would 
the North accede to these preposterous demands ?'' I an- 



swer, not only is it probable, from their uniform subserviency 
to their Southern masters, that the Peace Democrats would 
do it, hut it is ceHain that they must, if they mean to carry 
out their own principles consistently. The right of secession 
they already acknowledge, "and the rest follows, from their 
professed doctrines, by easy inference. 

If, as the O'Conors, Brookses, and other Peace Democrats, 
are never weary of telling us, the negro is an inferior animal, 
without civil rights, then the disposition of a few hundred 
thousand blacks is a matter of no more consequence than 
the disposal of the same number of cattle, and becomes an 
insignificent detail in face of the great question of peace. 
If the war is " unconstitutional," as Horatio Seymour pro- 
nounces it to be, all the measures employed in carrying it on 
must be tainted with the same unconstitutionality ; and, 
of these, the war-loans are not the least potent or prominent. 
If it is " unholy," as that Apostle of the New Gospel of 
Peace, F. Wood, declares — if we were impious and un- 
christian in taking up the gauntlet which the conspirators 
threw down to us at Sumter — then we, as repentant Chris- 
tians, under the guidance of that eminent disciple. Saint 
Fernando, should make what restitution we can to our ag- 
grieved and invaded secesh brethren. 

Such is the immediate prospect of degradation presented 
to us by the sages and patriots of Chicago, a degradation so 
deep and damnable, that it would make us a scorn and a 
hissing throughout the world, and any man with a soul 
above a flea's would be ashamed to look his own wife and 
children in the face. 

Let me conclude this part of our subject with a little 
anecdote, after the manner of our worthy Executive. 

Mile. Luther, a young and pretty Parisian actress, ac- 
cepted the protection of a well-known restaurateur. A lady 
named Doclie, of more experience in the profession, expos- 
tulated with her on the lowness of her choice — " My dear, 
you astonish me ! An eating-house jji-oprietor at your time 
of life ? One keeps that sort of thing for the last." 

So I say about submission to the enemy. One should heep 



that sort of thing for the last. When we are in the very 
ultimate ditch, with Washington besieged, Philadelphia 
taken, and Boston blockaded, with Gov. Seymour's friends 
pillaging and murdering in New York worse than they did 
last year, and no troops at hand to shoot them down, with 
gold at 2,000, and every boy of fifteen conscripted, then it 
will be time to talk of throwing away our arms and begging 
for peace. Submission on the part of those who cannot help 
themselves, if not honorable, is at least excusable. But what 
words can depict the infamy and degradation of those who 
suri'ender everything while they have the best of the fight, 
and run away from the battle when victory is hovering in 
their grasp ? 



THE COWARDS' CONVENTION-No. 2. 



To the Editor of the New York Times : 

Having shown that even were an honorable separation 
possible, it could not be obtained on the principles of the 
Chicago Convention, I proceed to the second proposition. 

Let it be admitted, for the sake of argument, that inno- 
vations might be made in our Democratic theory and prac- 
tice without injury. 

Such a hypothesis may be framed without doing violence 
to our intelligence or even to probability. We (by we I 
mean all of us who are not demagogues and place-hunters, 
and do not get a living by lies and flattery) know that 
nothing of man's institution is perfect, that Democracy is no 
exception to this rule, and our Democracy no exception in 
this respect to other Democracies. Those of us who have 
looked deeper into the matter know that any government, as 
it goes on, has a tendency to intensify its own faults, and 
that the predominant element of it is constantly absorbing 
all checks. Thus, as what we may call the centripetal ele- 
ment is constantly gaining ground in an autocracy, and accu- 
mulating more and more power about the one source of it, so 



8 



what we may call the centrifup^al element, is as constantly 
gaining ground in a Democracy. This has been exemplified 
in our own history ; for though the Federal Constitution has 
remained unaltered, thanks to the guards with which its wise 
framers surrounded it, the constitutions of nearly all the 
older states have been largely modified in a democratic sense.* 
In view of all which a change theoretically anomalous, might 
he practically beneficial. 

Our assumption, then, is not unreasonable in its very 
nature. It is not like those impossible figments of the brain 
put forth by the leading spirits at Chicago, so dreamy and 
baseless that the very rebels for whose benefit they were 
devised, cannot help laughing at them — proposing, for in- 
stance, that we should give up five and a half -states, of 
which we now hold possession, for the chance of getting 
them back some time or other by a conven^on — a piece of 
absurdity in comparison with which the fable of the dog and 
the shadow becomes a solid reality. 

Among our hypothetical changes might be a prolongation 
of the Presidential term to eight or ten years ; a return in 
all the states to a permanent judiciary ; a limitation of uni- 
versal suffrage in the great cities where its results have been 
so unsatisfactory ; and generally, without multiplying ex- 
amples, we may admit that a number of alterations, theoreti- 
cally anti-democratic, might be made without overthrowing 
the government or ruining the country. 

Note always, that these changes are not recommended. 
Their practicability is merely assumed for the sake of argu- 
ment. And after this assumption, it is still true that the in- 
novations brought about by the success of the Chicago plat- 
form, would be utterly subversive. 

For, in the first place, yielding to the rebels would involve 
a self-condemnation of democratic government by confessing 
its impotence for self-protection ; and in confessing this, we 
reaUy give up everything If such government were in all 



* TMs took place at the South less than at the North, owing to the con- 
tinued preponderance of an oligarehic element in the former. 



9 

other respects perfect, without this element it would be worth- 
less. It would resemble the horse who had but one fault — 
that he was dead. Once allow that a Government based on 
the voice of the majority m-ay be resisted by a minority, and 
the whole theory of democracy is as practically disproved as 
the divine right of Kings was in England when William of 
Orange walked in and kicked out James II. and his court of 
French pensioners, the Woods and Vallandighams of that 
day. Its existence is at once rendered precarious, and put at 
the mercy of any minority bold and cunning enough to conspire 
against it. This is what the foreign enemies of our Union were 
continually predicting — that it was not able to resist internal 
pressure ; and the Chicago leaders are intent on verifying 
their most sombre predictions. After this confession of weak- 
ness, our Government might not perish to-morrow or next 
month, but it would assuredly collapse as soon as another 
great strain was put upon it ; and we shall see hereafter to 
what sort of strains it would speedily be subjected. 

The utterly subversive character of this confession will 
become still clearer, if we consider the class in whose favor it 
is made. 

If there is any principle which more than all others may 
be called fundamental in the theory and practice of our Con- 
stitution, it is that of political equality — equal rights and no 
class privileges. And as it is the chief distinction, so is it the 
chief virtue of our Government. Nobody doubts that a man 
of wealth and refinement, who is willing to live selfishly — 
that is for himself and his class — may live more comfortably 
in several European countries. He can get more for his 
money, and find more agreeable companions. Our institu- 
tions were of and for the people, expressly designed to pro- 
mote the welfare and happiness of the greatest number. 
Conseqaently and naturally the people have always been jeal- 
ous of anything that looked like a tendency toward the estab- 
lishment of class prerogative. At one time they had a great 
fear of moneyed corporations, and though some of its phases 
at the time were extravagant, the subsequent encroachments 
of railroad and other companies on public and private rights 



10 

have proved that this fear was well founded. Hence too the 
" Native'^ movement, however j^rovoked or even jiiBtified by 
the misconduct of some of our foreign citizens, could never 
take root in the country. In the case of the negro, one un- 
fortunate exception was made to the rule of equal rights — an 
exception that has proved the rule with a vengeance.! 

But now this corner-stone of our Constitution is to be re- 
jected, and at whose bidding ? That of a sectional oligarchic 
class, amounting, according to the very largest estimate that 
Las been made of them, to a million of persons — something 
less than one thirtieth of the whole population, and fewer, 
comparatively, than the aristocratic class of England, 

And this is the upshot of so many years' teaching and 
practice of the once great Democratic party ! A party which, 
spasmodically faithful to its name, every now and then rode 
its hobby at the most erratic pace ; which hunted down 
banks and tariffs because it suspected in them the germ of a 
possible aristocracy ; which, in pursuit of the largest liberty, 
assigned, both by executive appointment and popular votes, 
the most notorious violators of law to be its special adminis- 
trators and guardians ; which decried learning and good 
manners as unrepublican, and claimed to be the special ser- 
vant, agent and friend of the working classes. The moment 
it finds itself face to face with an oligarchy of any courage 
and skill, it can suggest nothing except to surrender " body 
and boots," 

The French Emperor and his flatterers boast that he has 
reconciled the strong points of an autocratic and a democratic 
government. On this subject the world is not quite agreed ; 
many think the task too difficult even for a Napoleon. But, 
so much easier is evil than good, it is quite possible to com- 
bine some of the worst features of an oligarchy and ochlo- 
cracy ; and this is what the Chicago schemers are endeavor- 
ing to give us, I want none of their patent mixture. To 
borrow the indignant words of Mr, John Jay, " it is hard to 
say whether the sham aristocracy of the Southern slave mas- 
ters, or the sham Democracy of their Northern serfs, is the 
more despicable," 



11 



THE CO'WARDS' CONVENTION-No. 3. 



THE CHICAGO PLATFORM— TWO GOVERNMENTS, AND 
THE RESULT— CHAOS COME AGAIN- GEN. McCLEL- 
LAN— HLS PLATFORM AND HIMSELF— PEACE AND 
UNION. 

To the Editor of the New York Times: 

Having proved that the Chicago platform involves utter 
disgrace to the country, and a total abandonment of the 
fundamental principles of democracy, we shall now show 
how it will lead, and that not remotely, to a destruction of 
our national existence and an unlimited subdivision of the 
country. 

Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that the North 
and South might, under certain circumstances, co-exist as 
independent nations on the territory of the Union. 

Of course they would not co-exist comfortably. There 
would be wars and a state of disturbance approaching to 
chronic. All we suppose is, that they might exist, as the 
nations of Continental Europe, though they live uncomfort- 
able and expensively enough together, still live. 

But to make this state of things even hypothetically pos- 
sible, the North must be supposed to start fair with the 
South. 

How the South would start we may pretty accurately 
foresee. It would be a strong military oligarchy, composed 
of three classes — a ruling aristocracy, white plebeians and 
black slaves. Nominally, it would be -founded on a princi- 
23le of mutual dissolution, the " State Sovereignty" theory ; 
but it is obvious that this fiction was merely used as a means 
of getting certain States out of the Union, and that having 
served its purpose, it is now practically disregarded, as 
Davis' invasion of Kentucky and the recent language of his 
organs about North Carolina must clearly show. To resist 
the encroachments of such a power, the North would have 



12 



to be firmly united under a real, live national government 
(not a league or a confederacy dissoluble at pleasure) ; also, 
she must come out of tlie war unhumiliated and unweakened 
by any cession of border territory. She could not aiford to 
begin her separate existence as a conquered country. 

Now, how can the Chicago policy satisfy either of these 
conditions ? 

In the first place, the " immediate armistice" demanded 
by it will only be granted by Davis, on condition of our sur- 
rendering all the territory south of Mason and Dixon's line, 
including the capital. The first essential preliminary there- 
fore to the cessation of hostilities, is o^ir national destruction, 
for there is no case in history of a nation surviving the alien- 
ation of its capital. When the seat of government becomes 
permanently attached to another country, the nation^'is anni- 
hilated. Let us, however, in order to give ourselves every 
chance, suppose either that we shall inaugurate the excep- 
tions to this hitherto universal rule, or that Jefferson Davis 
shall be graciously pleased to leave us " My Maryland." 
Alas ! this goes but a little way to save us, for the next 
moment we stumble on something which prevents us from 
ever having an efficient government — the doctrine of " State 
Sovereignty." 

Doubtless the supporters of this disorganizing invention 
would like to use it as their master at Richmond has done, 
merely as a stepping-stone to power, which they might 
afterward cast aside. But they would find it impossible to 
lay the spirit of ruin they had evoked. The circumstances 
are not the same. We have no aristocratic and scarcely any 
plebeian class, no universal interest like Slavery to bind the 
States ; their "sovereignty" would be for us a fearful 
reality, and that reality — anarchy. 

The principle has been established that one or more states 
may lawfully and peaceably secede from the general govern- 
ment. As soon as the West is dissatisfied with a high tariff, 
or New-England with a aew one ; as soon as Pennsylvania 
wants a Fugitive Slave Law, or Ohio objects to one — quick, 
raise the standard of secession ! The central government 



13 

could only expect to maintain its integrity so long as it com- 
manded a majority in every state. 

Nay, how can we even hope that this disintegrating pro- 
cess would be confined to the separation of the states from 
one another ? We shall have to descend to much smaller 
fractions of government before we reach the ultimate atoms. 
Every one of the larger states contains a variety of conflict- 
ing interests. So far from a state possessing any peculiar 
indivisibility, as the disunionists claim, it is much easier to 
divide a state than the Union. That states can be divided 
is proved by the fact that they have been. Maine was made 
out of Massachusetts, Vermont out of New York and New 
Hampshire, and recently West Virginia out of Virginia. 

In estimating the destructive forces at work, we must not 
omit the outside influence of the Southern oligarchy, and 
the two great powers of Western Europe. The former 
would have no objections to acquiring the nearest portions of 
our territory as subject provinces ; the latter, remembering 
our ancient strength, would never rest till we were broken 
into the smallest pieces. The Europeans have as yet only 
ventured to work indirectly by intrigue ; they would then be 
emboldened to renew the Mexican experiment. 

With all these agencies undermining our government, 
nothing short of a perpetual miracle could avert its destruc- 
tion. The country would be comminuted. New England 
has homogeneousnesB enough to hold together, but all the 
territory west of the Hudson would be sundered into more 
fragments than there are states. The Southern pro-slavery 
portions of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, and Indiana, would 
separate from the Northern anti-slavery portions. The city 
of New York would break off from the state, the western 
counties from the eastern. Some of these fragments would 
probably be swallowed up by the Southern oligarchy or empire ; 
the others, if they did not become European dependencies, 
would go on squabbling among themselves, with no better 
position in the world than the South American Eepublics or 
the petty German states. 

The prospect is too terrible and melancholy to contemplate 



14 



without a shudcier, eTED- in imagination ; yet we must look 
at it, for the danger is here, imminent, right over our heads 
A Republican Senate may delay it for two years, but from 
the time that an armistice is under way, from the time that 
it is officially proposed by us our ruin is certain ; it may be 
delayed, but cannot be averted. 

One would gladly disbelieve that men can be found so in- 
fatuated as to labor day and night for the very purpose of 
bringing about this catastrophe ; but the fact is as undenia- 
ble as it is lamentable. They have been condemned too often 
out of their own mouths ; and disagreeable as the investiga- 
tion may be, the causes of their folly are, at least, not diffi- 
cult to find. 

In the first place, the copperhead is the mean white of the 
North. The Southern oligarch has established the same 
superiority over him as over his own plebeian neighbors. The 
copperhead is the slaveholder's servant, and in seeking to 
tear the country to pieces, he is only following his master's 
bidding. Secondly, he is inspired by an ever-craving lust 
for office and its emoluments, deprived of which, he rages 
like a beast deprived of its young. Certain jDoliticians of 
the old Democratic party had come to consider the govern- 
ment of the country as their own property, which they, like 
the Aldermanic " Ring" of New York, could farm out for 
their sole personal advantage, and in which no outsider had 
any right to interfere. 

Hence their blind fury against the Republicans, whom they 
regard as having robbed them of their own particular steal- 
ings. '' We will never let a single Republican hold office 
again !" exclaimed a triumphant Western Copperhead, two 
years ago, when the elections seemed to promise a restoration 
of his party to power. That was his idea of sending his op- 
ponents to Tartarus ! For vengeance these men will sacrifice 
anything. Earth and hell are alike ransacked ; no ally is to 
be despised or unsought ; Jefferson Davis, Louis Napoleon, 
the very English aristocracy whom they used to abuse — all 
these they beg, and beseech, and implore, and entreat and 
supplicate to come and help them ruin the country, so that 



15 



only they may be revenged on those infamous Black Eepuh- 
licans, who have excluded them from the fat places which 
were their gods ! 

But General McClellan, it may be said, is not an old poli- 
tician, or a " Peace-at-any-price" man. Ho explicity de- 
clares that Union is the only possible basis of peace. 

What then ? 

If we could take the General's letter by itself alone, " pure 
and simple," as the diplomatists say, then, without much 
coaxing, we might state the case thus : " The difference be- 
tween Lincoln and McClellan is that the former wishes the 
Union restored without slavery, and the latter wishes it re- 
stored with slavery. Lincoln tried McClellan's plan for a 
year and a half, and then was obliged to give it up and adopt 
the more radical course as a military necessity. McClellan's 
election would, therefore, put back the war, and is so far to 
be deprecated ; still, it does not necessarily involve absolute 
ruin." 

But, alas ! we can no more take the letter without the 
platform as an exposition of the party, than we can take 
Hebrews without John and James, or vice versa, as an expo- 
sition of the New Testament. The one complements the 
other, and it is too plain, on comparing them, that the letter 
was framed to catch one class of voters and the platform to 
catch another class, with directly conflicting views. And the 
comparison brings back to mind those twenty years of com- 
promise and dishonesty, when every candidate was bound to 
be " available," and every declaration of principles to be 
Janus-faced ; when the Presidents were miserable ciphers, 
the tools of their own cabinets ; when politics were regarded 
as a mere knaves' scramble for office, and most persons con- 
sidered government a mere superfluity — not a very ornamental 
one either — and the whole concern was driving to destruction 
in the merriest and pleasantest way imaginable. 

But in those days there was something to be said for 
" going in on the general issue," as Seymour calls it. Though 
the practice was gradually eating away all political honesty 
and truth, its fatal effects were not yet clearly perceptible, 



16 

and meanwhile the immediate questions before the people 
were not of a vital character. If a cabinet did split about a 
fiscal agent or an ad- valorem duty, nothing very terrible 
could come of it. 

Such is not the case now. The issue between the two 
branches of the so-called Democratic party is as grave and 
as clearly drawn as that between death and life. " Immedi- 
ate cessation of hostilities ;" "Union as an indispensable 
condition of peace." It is no more possible to be in favor of 
hoth these than it is to serve God and Mammon ; and an 
administration composed of Avar and peace men, swppostw(7 
them all to he in earnest, would resemble a coach with three 
horses at each end. 

Suppose McClellan elected. He must, according to all 
precedent, construct a Cabinet from both wings of his party. 
Then the President and half his Secretaries refuse to make 
peace except on the basis of Union. As Davis has spurned 
that condition in advance, they must go on with the war, in 
a slow, creepy, McClellanish sort of way, to be sure, but 
still go on with it somehow. But the other half of the 
Cabinet is, at least, equally earnest for an immediate cessa- 
tion of hostilities. Will they not, therefore, do all in their 
power to block, and trammel, and hinder the war — to bring 
to a stand-still what was already retarded in its progress ? 
And is ^ not this exactly what '^' our adversaries'" want ? 

No, the alternative between the two candidates, Lincoln 
and McClellan, and the two parties, the Republican and the 
so-called Democratic, is Peace and Union through the War, 
or Permanent separation, Dishonor, and Destruction. Which 
will the American people choose ? 



Loyal Leagues, Clubs, or individuals may obtain any of 
our publications at the cost price, by application to the Ex- 
ecutive Committee, or by calling at the Rooms of the So- 
ciety. 863 Broadway, where all information may be obtained 
relating to the Society. 



The Loyal Publication Society has already issued a large 
number of Slips and Pamphlets, which have been widely cir- 
culated. Among the most important are the following : 

No. 1. Future of the Northwest. By Rolert Dale Oicen. 

2. Echo fi-om the Army. 

3. Union Mass Meeting — Speeches of Brady, Van B '.ren, <^c. 

4. Three Voices: the Soldier, Farmer, and Poet. 

5. Voices from the Army. 
G. Northern True Men. 

7. Speech of Major-Gnueral Butler. 

8. Separation ; War without End. Ed. Lahoulaye. 

9. The Venom and the Antidote. 

10. A Few Words in Behalf of the Loyal Women of the United 

States. By One of Thtmselces. 

11. No Failure for the North. Atlantic Mcmtldy. 

12. Address to King Cotton. Eugene Pelletan. 

13. How a Free People conduct a Long AVar. SHUe. 

14. The Preservation of the Union, a National Economic Necessity. 

15. Elements of Discords in Secessia, &c., &c. 

16. No Party now, but all for our Country. Francis Lleher. 
17._The Cause of the AVar. Col. Charles Anderson. 

18. Opinions of the early Presidents and of the Fathers of the 

Republic upon Slavery, and upon Negroes as Men and Soldiers. 

19. (ginljeit unb i'rciljeit, yon i^ermann U after 

. 20._]Military Despotism ! Suspension of the Habeas Corpus ! &c. 

21. Letter addressed to the Opera-Hou.se Meeting, Cincinnati. 

By Col. Charles Anderson. 

22. Emancipation is Peace. By Robert Dale Ouen. 

23. Letter of Peter Cooper on Slave Emancipation. 

24._ Patriotism. Sermon by the Bev. Jos. Fransioli, of St. Peter's 
(Catholic) Church, Brooklyn. 

25. The Conditions of Reconstruction. By Robert Dale Owen. 

26. Letter to the President. By Gen. A. J. Hamilton, of Texas. 
27._Nullification and Compromise : a Retrospective View. 

28. The Death of Slavery. Letter from Peter Cooper to Gov. Seymour. 

29. Slavery Plantations and the Yeomanry. By Francis Lieber. 

30. Rebel Conditions of Peace. 

31. Address of the Loyal Leagues. 

32. War Power of the President — Summary Imprisonment — 

by /. Heermans. 

33. The Two Ways of Treason. 

34. Monroe Doctrine. By Edtcard Everett, Sfc. 

35 The Arguments of Secessionists. Francis Lieber. 
36._^Prophe'cy' and Fulfilment.— Letter of A. H. Stephens. Address of 
E. W. Gantt. 



37. 

38. 

39. 

40. 
41. 
42. 
43. 
44. 
45. 

46. 
47. 
48. 
49. 
50. 

51. 
5-2. 
53. 

54. 
55. 

5G. 

57. 
53. 
59. 
60. 
01. 
62. 
63. 
64. 
05. 
60. 
67. 

68. 
60 



How the South Rejected Compromise, &c. Speech of Mr. Chase. 
Letters on our National Struggle. By Brigadier-General Thomas 

Francis Meagher. 
Bible View of Slavery, By John H. Hopkins, D. D., Bishop of the 
Diocese of Vermont, examined by Henri/ Drisler. 
The Conscription Act : a Series of Articles. Bi/ Geo. B. Butler, N. Y. 
Reply of De Gasparin, Laboiilaye and others, to Loyal National League. 
The same in the original French. 
The same in German. 

First Anniversary Meeting of the Loyal Publication Society. 
Finances and Resources of the United States. Speech of the Hon. 

Henry G. Stebbins, in tiie House of Representatives, March 3, 1864. 
How tiie War was Commenced. An Appeal to the Documents. 
Results of the Serf Emancipation in Russia. 
Resources of the United States Bt/ Samuel B. Ruggles. 
Soldiers' and Sailors' Patriotic Songs. 
The Constitution Vindicated — Nationality, Secession, Slavery. By 

James A. Hamilton. 
No Property in Man. Speech of Hon. Charles Sumner. 
Rebellion, Slavery, and Peace. Bij Hon. N. G. Upham. 

lX)ic bcr tiricg ang^fangcnuiurbe. Q:ine Bcrufung auf bie 
Dokiimcntc. 

Our Burden and Our Strength. By David A. Wells. 

tDer cmnncipirtc Sklayc nnb fdn ^cxt. 

Assertions of a Secessionist. From the Speeches of A. H. Stephens, 

of Georgia. 
Growler's Income Tax. 
Emancipated Slave. By .Tames BL Kayc. 

Cincoln obcr i^U^Tlcllan. 

Peace through Victory. By Rev J. P. Thompson. 
Sherman versus Hood. 
War for the L^nion. 

McClellan's Nomination and Acceftance. 
Letters of Loyal Soldiers. Parts 1, 2, and 3. 
Su1jmi.?sionist and their Record. 
Coertiou Completed. By John C. Hamilton. 
Lincoln or McClellin. Appeal to the Germans in America. 
By Francis Lieber. Translated from the German hv T C. 
The Cowards" Convention. Parts 1, 2, and 3. 
Whom do English Tories wi.>h elected to the Presidencv. 



Loyal Leagues^ Clubs, or individuals, may obtain any of our 
publications at the cost price, by application to the Executive 
Committee, or by calling at the Eooms of the Society, Xo. 863 
Broadway, where all information may be obtained relating to 
the Society. librpry of congress 



012 027 622 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




012 027 622 



Hollinger 

pH8.5 

Mill Run F3-1955 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




012 027 622 O 



HoUinger 

pH8.5 

Mill Run F3-1955 



